| Literature DB >> 21319482 |
Tracy McConnell-Henry1, Ysanne Chapman, Karen Francis.
Abstract
Although member-checking has long been accepted as the gold standard in quantitative research, it is not the pinnacle for expressing rigour in Heideggerian phenomenology because it contradicts many o the underpinning philosophies. Similarly, employing 'experts' to confirm findings conflicts with the values of interpretivism. In this paper, th authors argue that member-checking is frequently used to cover poor interview technique or a lack of understanding of the methodology chosen to underpin the study. They debate why member-checking is incongruent with Heideggerian philosophy and suggest strategies that enhance the generation of data and render the follow-u interview redundant.Mesh:
Year: 2011 PMID: 21319482 DOI: 10.7748/nr2011.01.18.2.28.c8282
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nurse Res ISSN: 1351-5578